Disaster U.S. Significantly Weakens Endangered Species Act -

ThinkThankThunk

s-m-r-t
kiwifarms.net
The article said:
"And, for the first time, regulators would be allowed to conduct economic assessments — for instance, estimating lost revenue from a prohibition on logging in a critical habitat — when deciding whether a species warrants protection"
There goes protections for every one of the guano-cave micro-habitats in the Alabama coal strip. There are hundreds of caves that were left partially submerged when the American ocean receded, and almost every single one has fish and crustaceans that have since speciated from each other and live in populations of no more than maybe a dozen at a time. All it would take is a single dirty boot stepping into their pools to kill them all, and now we could see the land ceded to whoever promises to shit out the most toxic waste. I'd be a little less livid if we at least had the time to sequence their DNA and properly document them first, but endangered species research just isn't that efficient yet.

Normally I don't care much for far-reaching environment protections, since most land has either been so thoroughly developed on that there's nothing left to protect, or the flora and fauna that would be protected have well-established populations in other ranges to begin with. Fucking with endangered statuses though, especially when it's solely out of economic interests and outright disregards the fact that the species in question are still endangered drives me fucking bananas.

Literally 97% of climate scientists, numerous scientific organizations, and peer-reviewed studies have reached the consensus that human-influenced climate change is real but sure, it's "fake." Let's also ignore the fact that climate change denial is funded and lobbied by the fossil fuel industry.
As much as I'd like to care about what we can do about climate change, the unfortunate reality is that unless you can get China and India to stop belching out gazillions of tons of gaseous shit into the air at any given moment to support their multi-billion person strong plastic waste industries, no amount of protection elsewhere will curb the effects. I see little point in getting angry about the western regulations on emissions when any effort to lower them are subverted ten-fold by increases in the third world. The far more pressing concern is habitat destruction, which is much more easily prevented but in no way interests the politicians vying for oil and forestry money.
 

FierceBrosnan

Still 100% Daddy, don't ever think otherwise.
kiwifarms.net
What gets me about many of the articles about the shenanigans around is they are all calling this an "attack". Like Trump and his staff are going on a foxhunt, but for bald eagles and pandas ( which admittedly would be hilarious).

This article seems to be less about climate change and more about loggers and whatnot encroaching on habitats and such, which should be regulated and heavily. Climate change is going to happen whether we like it or not and there is no saving some critters from nature. All we can do is curb anything that speeds up the process.
 

turboNIG-3k

Neither Rich nor Evans
kiwifarms.net
Literally 97% of climate scientists, numerous scientific organizations, and peer-reviewed studies have reached the consensus that human-influenced climate change is real but sure, it's "fake." Let's also ignore the fact that climate change denial is funded and lobbied by the fossil fuel industry.
"climate scientist"
lmao
e: more seriously, if you look at the data then you can see that earth IS getting warmer, and co2 does emit energy in the thermal spectrum, but cmon, its pretty obvious its in the best interest of these hucksters to make doomsday predictions
 

Damn Near

It's lovely to be here, thank you for having me
kiwifarms.net
There goes protections for every one of the guano-cave micro-habitats in the Alabama coal strip. There are hundreds of caves that were left partially submerged when the American ocean receded, and almost every single one has fish and crustaceans that have since speciated from each other and live in populations of no more than maybe a dozen at a time. All it would take is a single dirty boot stepping into their pools to kill them all, and now we could see the land ceded to whoever promises to shit out the most toxic waste. I'd be a little less livid if we at least had the time to sequence their DNA and properly document them first, but endangered species research just isn't that efficient yet.

Normally I don't care much for far-reaching environment protections, since most land has either been so thoroughly developed on that there's nothing left to protect, or the flora and fauna that would be protected have well-established populations in other ranges to begin with. Fucking with endangered statuses though, especially when it's solely out of economic interests and outright disregards the fact that the species in question are still endangered drives me fucking bananas.


As much as I'd like to care about what we can do about climate change, the unfortunate reality is that unless you can get China and India to stop belching out gazillions of tons of gaseous shit into the air at any given moment to support their multi-billion person strong plastic waste industries, no amount of protection elsewhere will curb the effects. I see little point in getting angry about the western regulations on emissions when any effort to lower them are subverted ten-fold by increases in the third world. The far more pressing concern is habitat destruction, which is much more easily prevented but in no way interests the politicians vying for oil and forestry money.
Not that i don't think this is a bad idea, but if you're in a cave and your population is limited to maybe dozens, what the hell good are you?
 
Literally 97% of climate scientists, numerous scientific organizations, and peer-reviewed studies have reached the consensus that human-influenced climate change is real but sure, it's "fake." Let's also ignore the fact that climate change denial is funded and lobbied by the fossil fuel industry.
Hahaha, you need to update your playbook. This is so 2001.

In the meantime, those statistics have been dissected backwards and forwards and shown to be bullshit based on other bullshit taken out of context.

Also, 2 of your links are from the same wikipedia article. Come the fuck on...

"climate scientist"
lmao
e: more seriously, if you look at the data then you can see that earth IS getting warmer, and co2 does emit energy in the thermal spectrum, but cmon, its pretty obvious its in the best interest of these hucksters to make doomsday predictions
Well... the earth is getting warmer, yeah, the data shows a pretty darn clear trend.
CO2 doesn't "emit energy" but it seems to act as an insulator, or a "greenhouse gas" in that it reflects back more sunlight back to earth than it blocks from reaching the earth.

Yeah, the very basic facts like that are true and easy to check yourself. And it's good to do so, so you don't sound like an idiot when you bring a snowball to the senate floor to prove there's no such thing as global warming...

As for the rest, usually a scientific theory has to make more than 0 successful predictions for people to take it very seriously. Global warming theory is sitting at 0. (Unless you want to give them 1 for saying "It will get warmer" but anyone who can extrapolate a trend line would say that)

The doomsday shit is completely unsupported. In fact, most of that comes from UN spokespeople and the "Climate Scientists" often complain their research is misrepresented.

Global Lukewarming is a theory that's gaining a lot of ground, basically, yeah, the warming pattern will continue, but overall it will not be very negative, maybe even positive, but most importantly, the efforts to prevent it would cause more deaths than just dealing with it.

There's a lot of fascinating shit to read on the subject, unfortunately it's politicized and of course doomsday predictions are more interesting than "Everything will be fine" predictions.
 
Last edited:

TowinKarz

Thoroughly Unimpressed
kiwifarms.net
Not that i don't think this is a bad idea, but if you're in a cave and your population is limited to maybe dozens, what the hell good are you?
Coal mining has been going on in the Appalachians for as long as there's been an America.... if the species in question were THAT fragile, then we ignorantly killed them 180 years ago.
 
Coal mining has been going on in the Appalachians for as long as there's been an America.... if the species in question were THAT fragile, then we ignorantly killed them 180 years ago.
More likely a larger population was split, and each separate population becomes a new species. Supposedly, just living somewhere else means they can be considered separate species.

Also, a local population of a common animal can become endangered, even if the only reason they're there is because of humans.
 

Clop

kiwifarms.net
This is so reckless, thoughtless, dangerous, and careless. Does anyone care about anything other than making a dollar? This is all about the oil, gas, and mining industries. They want a free for all. They want to be able to drill, to strip, to mine wherever and whenever they want with abandonment, and they're pissed that laws like the Endangered Species Act prevent them from doing it.
The Endangered Species Act is so butt-fucking corrupt that real estate and any big corp needing land for their strip malls abuses the system. You can guess who is displeased that the regs are stripped down. You can't win this fucking game no matter what you do.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
Good. The weak should fear the strong.

Possible cure for cancer, Alzheimer’s, and longevity good?
My man we haven't even characterized most of the species living in the dirt in your backyard. We're not close to needing to scrape the bottom of the barrel that is isolated Mayan cave systems to get novel gene products. People just do it because it's cool and sexy and gets funding and pays for a vacation.
 

Dr W

Heaven is void of light
kiwifarms.net
I mean, my whole stance on climate change now is: fuck trying to tell people whether it's real or not. Coal and oil are finite resources and we're going to run out of them eventually, and I'd rather not fuck over our future generations by denying them power, so renewables and extremely long lasting fuel sources (IE: Thorium, Uranium, stupidity), should be used instead in order to create a more long-term global energy environment.
 

CWCchange

ǝƃuɐɥɔƆMƆ
kiwifarms.net
I can already tell this thread is going to go places

>tfw no far-right but ecofriendly party
Any endangered species regulation is pointless when it fails to classify the most important one of them all who created the original regulations.

Any exotic species regulation is pointless when it fails to classify the most invasive of them from countries decimating forests and rivers.
 

Barnard

kiwifarms.net
Literally 97% of climate scientists, numerous scientific organizations, and peer-reviewed studies have reached the consensus that human-influenced climate change is real but sure, it's "fake." Let's also ignore the fact that climate change denial is funded and lobbied by the fossil fuel industry.
My main issue with your first link is that it appears to be outdated. I have explored the scientific articles it uses as factual basis (most notably this article) and the most recent surveys are from 2015. The most recent survey conducted among actual climate science experts was conducted in 2012 and published in 2014. Have there really been no more recent surveys?

I also think the 97% soundbite is a tad exaggerated for effect. The 2012 survey I mention above says that 89% of the most active (>10 publications) climate scientists agree on anthropogenic climate change. Another one (conducted in 2013) gives 93%. Two other recent ones concern non-climate scientists. The 97% figure comes from an independent examination of climate science article abstracts spanning two decades, but is trying to infer things from abstracts more reliable than asking scientists directly?

Either way I'm not going to rate you Dumb because I still think that the large majority of scientists believe the climate is changing and humans make a contribution to this change. But things are probably more nuanced than alarmists or denialists would like us to believe. The main, most practical issue is not if or why climate change is happening, but how severe it is, what impact would it have on our future, if we should be making some incredibly drastic changes in response (like certain politicians would like to do), and if so, how do we even force China or India to care. These studies don't touch upon any of these topics.
 
Last edited:

Buttigieg2020

kiwifarms.net
I mean, my whole stance on climate change now is: fuck trying to tell people whether it's real or not. Coal and oil are finite resources and we're going to run out of them eventually, and I'd rather not fuck over our future generations by denying them power, so renewables and extremely long lasting fuel sources (IE: Thorium, Uranium, stupidity), should be used instead in order to create a more long-term global energy environment.
That’s how you know the leadership of these movements either doesn’t care or doesn’t have a plan. We could’ve had France’s nuclear grid using nuclear reactors decades ago, but environmentalists and other interests flipped shit. Instead we’re stuck pretending solar is a viable method of power for an industrial country.

Besides the 97% meme, the number of scientists who believe Humans are the primary cause is much lower. Solar output, orbital position, volcanic eruptions, etc all play a major part.
 
Last edited:

Dr W

Heaven is void of light
kiwifarms.net
That’s how you know the leadership of these movements either doesn’t care or doesn’t have a plan. We could’ve had France’s nuclear grid using thorium reactors decades ago, but environmentalists and other interests flipped shit. Instead we’re stuck pretending solar is a viable method of power for an industrial country.

Besides the 97% meme, the number of scientists who believe Humans are the primary cause is much lower. Solar output, orbital position, volcanic eruptions, etc all play a major part.
Climate change and the articles about it were never actually meant to address the situation (outside of a few niche cases which point out viable solutions, ie, nuclear, hydroelectric (in some places), shoveling the morbidly obese into furnaces, etc.), it was only meant to further the divide between left and right.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino